Pomaikai wrote: »

Because most of us realize that this is a good business practice as opposed to being a shady one.

This right here. Shady business practices are things like cutting baby formula with industrial plastic or dumping toxic waste by a playground. This is a freaking inventory expansion in a video game for Stendarr's sake!

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

This also doesn't make them selfish, greedy

Wanting nonsubs to never be able to access the craft bags is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL.

Wanting subs to never have a worthwhile perk is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL. I was a kid once too. I can still hang with your poorly thought out teenage arguments.

But you already have worthwhile perks, like the craft bag. What are you talking about? Nobody here asked for it to be removed from ESO plus.

I have no words. I'll try though. You realize what a perk is...right? The craft bag is the only worthwhile perk. Why would I continue to sub if the only worthwhile perk is a one time purchase from the crown store? I feel like you're just messing with me on that last comment. You do realize that before the craft bag, buying crowns on sale throughout the year, then using them to buy the dlc's outright is actually a better option than subbing, right? Having the only good perk obtainable in some other, cheaper in the long run fashion, kinda makes it less than appealing to sub for that "perk." Doesn't it now?

Do you realize what a perk is? Do you realize that subscribing offers more perks than just the craft bags? Do you realize that many of these perks are also available for purchase in the crown store, and that the option to purchase them has not stopped them from still being subscriber perks? Why should craft bags be any different?

It is rather obvious. If the previous sub perks were bringing in tons of subs, ZOS might have sold the craft bag. It likely became clear, that if they didn't add a big incentive to sub, that the number of subs would continue to dwindle. Businesses that don't have predictable income have trouble planning for future content. If you don't know if you'll make money, it is hard to plan to spend that money.

Introducing the Crafting Bag! A huge reason to sub and likely bloated their sub numbers overnight. If people can one time purchase this, the game would go back to having very little reason to sub.

Companies don't offer perks out of the goodness of their hearts. They want you to subsribe to a payment plan so that they can show that they have a predictable and rather stable revenue stream.

This isn't about what subs should get and what is fair and good in the world. It is about how to run a business. Judging from the number of people that have said they are subbing for the bag, it sounds like a smart business move by ZOS.

Companies want pay to win

The crafting bad inventory relief is so extreme that it makes me feel it should have been part of the base game.

What new things, that should have been part of the base game, will we see only offered for subscription in the future?

Typhoios wrote: »

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

This also doesn't make them selfish, greedy

Wanting nonsubs to never be able to access the craft bags is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL.

Wanting subs to never have a worthwhile perk is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL. I was a kid once too. I can still hang with your poorly thought out teenage arguments.

But you already have worthwhile perks, like the craft bag. What are you talking about? Nobody here asked for it to be removed from ESO plus.

I have no words. I'll try though. You realize what a perk is...right? The craft bag is the only worthwhile perk. Why would I continue to sub if the only worthwhile perk is a one time purchase from the crown store? I feel like you're just messing with me on that last comment. You do realize that before the craft bag, buying crowns on sale throughout the year, then using them to buy the dlc's outright is actually a better option than subbing, right? Having the only good perk obtainable in some other, cheaper in the long run fashion, kinda makes it less than appealing to sub for that "perk." Doesn't it now?

Do you realize what a perk is? Do you realize that subscribing offers more perks than just the craft bags? Do you realize that many of these perks are also available for purchase in the crown store, and that the option to purchase them has not stopped them from still being subscriber perks? Why should craft bags be any different?

It is rather obvious. If the previous sub perks were bringing in tons of subs, ZOS might have sold the craft bag. It likely became clear, that if they didn't add a big incentive to sub, that the number of subs would continue to dwindle. Businesses that don't have predictable income have trouble planning for future content. If you don't know if you'll make money, it is hard to plan to spend that money.

Introducing the Crafting Bag! A huge reason to sub and likely bloated their sub numbers overnight. If people can one time purchase this, the game would go back to having very little reason to sub.

Companies don't offer perks out of the goodness of their hearts. They want you to subsribe to a payment plan so that they can show that they have a predictable and rather stable revenue stream.

This isn't about what subs should get and what is fair and good in the world. It is about how to run a business. Judging from the number of people that have said they are subbing for the bag, it sounds like a smart business move by ZOS.

Here's the problem. A number of players (I'd have to do a lot of forum digging to determine exactly which ones) who have argued that the craft bags should remain for subscribers only have used the "sunk cost fallacy" as a rationalization to attempt to convince others who have already purchased other items available as subscriber perks (DLC, etc.) that they should subscribe. Key to this argument is the idea that the DLC remains a subscriber perk, regardless of whether a player has already purchased access to such content. But you can't have it both ways, either perks are still perks, even when available for purchase, or they all cease to be perks if they have been bought. Which is it? If the former, then it should not matter to those who subscribe for this perk if it is also available for purchase. If the latter, then "sunk cost" is no longer a valid argument for subscription.

Now, you can talk about ZOS's motivations for doing it this way, and I will fully agree that ZOS chose this path because they thought it would make them more money. I think it is dishonest for them to do so, but I won't dispute you on their reasoning. However, that's not what I'm asking about, nor what I am interested in. I want to know why subscribers feel their perk would no longer be a perk, simply because someone else chose to purchase it. It doesn't take anything away from them, and if they so choose, they would have the same option available. It would work the exact same way as the DLC perks, and would be just as fair. So how does having one more perk available for purchase negate it being a perk (from the perspective of the player, not ZOS).

But of course you are right, ZOS is doing this for the money. Since ZOS has shown that they have no intention of keeping their previous promises, the only way to change their mind on this will be to show them that they are wrong. To do that, those who have chosen to purchase content rather then subscribe need to not begin subscribing for these bags. If a significant enough portion of the players take this option, ZOS will see that they were wrong, and should realize that there is more money to be made by offering these (or an alternative) for purchase. This is the path I intend to take, but knowing my fellow gamers as I do, I expect that their will is weak and many will cave. Pansies.

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

This also doesn't make them selfish, greedy

Wanting nonsubs to never be able to access the craft bags is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL.

Wanting subs to never have a worthwhile perk is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL. I was a kid once too. I can still hang with your poorly thought out teenage arguments.

But you already have worthwhile perks, like the craft bag. What are you talking about? Nobody here asked for it to be removed from ESO plus.

I have no words. I'll try though. You realize what a perk is...right? The craft bag is the only worthwhile perk. Why would I continue to sub if the only worthwhile perk is a one time purchase from the crown store? I feel like you're just messing with me on that last comment. You do realize that before the craft bag, buying crowns on sale throughout the year, then using them to buy the dlc's outright is actually a better option than subbing, right? Having the only good perk obtainable in some other, cheaper in the long run fashion, kinda makes it less than appealing to sub for that "perk." Doesn't it now?

Listen, i know what motivation ZOS has to do this, lke you and everyone already knows, money. What I don't understand is why there are so many people supporting this shady business practice. I'm talking about why the community of subs supports this. Because I can't find any rational reason for it other than hating nonsubs at this point. I want to hear YOUR reason, not ZOS' reason.

I don't find it the least bit shady and can't for the life of me figure out why you and some others do. Why are you stating that they are doing this for money like it's some sort of bad thing or dirty word? I like the crafting bag, it's great. Why would I not support that. Everyone else who likes it can have it too, with the price of the sub. Why in your mind is a sub perk shady, all about the money and somehow wrong, and a crown store purchase a shining example of purity and fair business practice. A subscription is what it is. I don't have HBO because I know my neighbor doesn't and I hate him. I can't seem to follow this logic. They announced it as a subscriber perk, it went in as a subscriber perk. End of story. What's the big deal? Where is the greed and shady business practice in that? You've made no argument whatsoever as to why this is a bad thing, but demand I tell you why I think it's good and why I won't agree that it falls under some corporate big money scam. You want me to agree that owning a subscription to something and enjoying the perks, somehow denotes that I hate everyone without said subscription. Why?

wayfarerx wrote: »

Blackbird71 wrote: »

wayfarerx wrote: »

Pomaikai wrote: »

Because most of us realize that this is a good business practice as opposed to being a shady one.

This right here. Shady business practices are things like cutting baby formula with industrial plastic or dumping toxic waste by a playground. This is a freaking inventory expansion in a video game for Stendarr's sake!

Making a promise to customers on which they base their purchase choices and then changing that promise would also qualify as a "shady business practice". Video game or not, the business is still subject to ethical standards, and a business practice does not have to cause bodily harm to qualify as shady.

By your standard ZOS could never add anything to ESO+ ever again for fear of being labeled "unethical" and "dishonest." They never once promised that ESO+ was always going to be the way it was when it went B2P, and in fact the crafting bag was floated as a possible subscriber perk all the way back in early 2015.

Not to sound too condescending, but your position is silly. Not liking a thing or its price does not make it unethical.

Since apparently reading one page back is too difficult for some people, I'll quote my previous post (currently on page 6):

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Here is the problem that is at the crux of the crafting bag issue. When ZOS chose to change the game to launch Tamriel Unlimited, they established that there were now two legitimate and equally acceptable methods of getting access to the content of ESO: players could purchase the game, and then maintain a monthly subscription which would get them continued access to all of the game's content, or they could purchase the game, and then purchase access to additional content as it became available ala carte. It is worth noting that many other MMOs have employed one or the other of these pay models, but few have implemented both at the same time. Regardless, when ZOS established both of these models as options for their players and customers, they declared that both would be equally valid methods to access the content of ESO. This was their promise to us, and different players with different preferences each chose to invest in one or the other of these methods based on that promise.

Now, with the introduction of crafting bags as a subscriber-only benefit, with no equivalent option for the alternative purchase model, ZOS has made one of these two models less valid than the other. This clearly runs contrary to their initial declaration and promise, so yes it is disingenuous, as it casts doubt on their integrity, and it raises the question of what ZOS may do in the future to further invalidate and delegitimize one of the pay methods which we were told was equally acceptable as an option. In the case of many of us, this is being done after ZOS has accepted significant amounts of our money under this pay model, which only serves to further destroy customer trust in ZOS' ethics and integrity.

I can only speak for myself in this last part, but I know that I for one will not subscribe to gain access to these craft bags, specifically because I choose not to reward dishonest business practices. It will also likely be some time before I purchase any more crowns, as ZOS will have to regain my trust as a customer before I do so, and once my trust is lost, it is very difficult to earn back.

Calling this unethical, dishonest, shady, etc., has nothing to do with "disliking a price"; it has everything to do with going back on a promise; a promise that both methods of accessing content would be equally viable, and that no content available to one would be locked out from the other.

Trying to diminish this argument by claiming it is about "disliking a price" is intellectually dishonest, as you ignore the issues claimed by those making complaints and substitute your own version in order to make it an easier target to attack. This is commonly known as a "strawman argument".

And of course they're doing it for the money. Are you truly that dense? They're a BUSINESS! That's what they're in business for. Making money! Duh...

Police Departments are a business, but should they be writing more speeding tickets? Well of course, because they want to make money don't they? Shouldn't we just go along with that?

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

This also doesn't make them selfish, greedy

Wanting nonsubs to never be able to access the craft bags is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL.

Wanting subs to never have a worthwhile perk is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL. I was a kid once too. I can still hang with your poorly thought out teenage arguments.

But you already have worthwhile perks, like the craft bag. What are you talking about? Nobody here asked for it to be removed from ESO plus.

I have no words. I'll try though. You realize what a perk is...right? The craft bag is the only worthwhile perk. Why would I continue to sub if the only worthwhile perk is a one time purchase from the crown store? I feel like you're just messing with me on that last comment. You do realize that before the craft bag, buying crowns on sale throughout the year, then using them to buy the dlc's outright is actually a better option than subbing, right? Having the only good perk obtainable in some other, cheaper in the long run fashion, kinda makes it less than appealing to sub for that "perk." Doesn't it now?

Listen, i know what motivation ZOS has to do this, lke you and everyone already knows, money. What I don't understand is why there are so many people supporting this shady business practice. I'm talking about why the community of subs supports this. Because I can't find any rational reason for it other than hating nonsubs at this point. I want to hear YOUR reason, not ZOS' reason.

I don't find it the least bit shady and can't for the life of me figure out why you and some others do. Why are you stating that they are doing this for money like it's some sort of bad thing or dirty word? I like the crafting bag, it's great. Why would I not support that. Everyone else who likes it can have it too, with the price of the sub. Why in your mind is a sub perk shady, all about the money and somehow wrong, and a crown store purchase a shining example of purity and fair business practice. A subscription is what it is. I don't have HBO because I know my neighbor doesn't and I hate him. I can't seem to follow this logic. They announced it as a subscriber perk, it went in as a subscriber perk. End of story. What's the big deal? Where is the greed and shady business practice in that? You've made no argument whatsoever as to why this is a bad thing, but demand I tell you why I think it's good and why I won't agree that it falls under some corporate big money scam. You want me to agree that owning a subscription to something and enjoying the perks, somehow denotes that I hate everyone without said subscription. Why?

wayfarerx wrote: »

Blackbird71 wrote: »

wayfarerx wrote: »

Pomaikai wrote: »

Because most of us realize that this is a good business practice as opposed to being a shady one.

This right here. Shady business practices are things like cutting baby formula with industrial plastic or dumping toxic waste by a playground. This is a freaking inventory expansion in a video game for Stendarr's sake!

Making a promise to customers on which they base their purchase choices and then changing that promise would also qualify as a "shady business practice". Video game or not, the business is still subject to ethical standards, and a business practice does not have to cause bodily harm to qualify as shady.

By your standard ZOS could never add anything to ESO+ ever again for fear of being labeled "unethical" and "dishonest." They never once promised that ESO+ was always going to be the way it was when it went B2P, and in fact the crafting bag was floated as a possible subscriber perk all the way back in early 2015.

Not to sound too condescending, but your position is silly. Not liking a thing or its price does not make it unethical.

Since apparently reading one page back is too difficult for some people, I'll quote my previous post (currently on page 6):

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Here is the problem that is at the crux of the crafting bag issue. When ZOS chose to change the game to launch Tamriel Unlimited, they established that there were now two legitimate and equally acceptable methods of getting access to the content of ESO: players could purchase the game, and then maintain a monthly subscription which would get them continued access to all of the game's content, or they could purchase the game, and then purchase access to additional content as it became available ala carte. It is worth noting that many other MMOs have employed one or the other of these pay models, but few have implemented both at the same time. Regardless, when ZOS established both of these models as options for their players and customers, they declared that both would be equally valid methods to access the content of ESO. This was their promise to us, and different players with different preferences each chose to invest in one or the other of these methods based on that promise.

Now, with the introduction of crafting bags as a subscriber-only benefit, with no equivalent option for the alternative purchase model, ZOS has made one of these two models less valid than the other. This clearly runs contrary to their initial declaration and promise, so yes it is disingenuous, as it casts doubt on their integrity, and it raises the question of what ZOS may do in the future to further invalidate and delegitimize one of the pay methods which we were told was equally acceptable as an option. In the case of many of us, this is being done after ZOS has accepted significant amounts of our money under this pay model, which only serves to further destroy customer trust in ZOS' ethics and integrity.

I can only speak for myself in this last part, but I know that I for one will not subscribe to gain access to these craft bags, specifically because I choose not to reward dishonest business practices. It will also likely be some time before I purchase any more crowns, as ZOS will have to regain my trust as a customer before I do so, and once my trust is lost, it is very difficult to earn back.

Calling this unethical, dishonest, shady, etc., has nothing to do with "disliking a price"; it has everything to do with going back on a promise; a promise that both methods of accessing content would be equally viable, and that no content available to one would be locked out from the other.

Please refrain from quoting me when I have not engaged you in conversation up to this point. Why you felt the need to quote my response to another posters question, directed specifically to me, is beyond reason. Why are you directing me to a lengthy post full of sensationalism and half truths that you wrote earlier, when at no point did I comment on said post or directly to you? Reading one page back is not too difficult for me, but it would seem reading to see which individuals have engaged you in discussion is.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

@Blackbird71 , it is because people know that the crafting bag is an extreme advantage and want to be on the winning side of the game rather than the side that deals with hours of inventory micro-management. Who wouldn't want potential opponents to be at a disadvantage?

What do I win for having a more organized inventory than someone else? What do I do with all this free time while the non-sub hoarders micro manager their inventories?

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Typhoios wrote: »

Blackbird71 wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

This also doesn't make them selfish, greedy

Wanting nonsubs to never be able to access the craft bags is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL.

Wanting subs to never have a worthwhile perk is definitely not selfish or greedy right? LOL. I was a kid once too. I can still hang with your poorly thought out teenage arguments.

But you already have worthwhile perks, like the craft bag. What are you talking about? Nobody here asked for it to be removed from ESO plus.

I have no words. I'll try though. You realize what a perk is...right? The craft bag is the only worthwhile perk. Why would I continue to sub if the only worthwhile perk is a one time purchase from the crown store? I feel like you're just messing with me on that last comment. You do realize that before the craft bag, buying crowns on sale throughout the year, then using them to buy the dlc's outright is actually a better option than subbing, right? Having the only good perk obtainable in some other, cheaper in the long run fashion, kinda makes it less than appealing to sub for that "perk." Doesn't it now?

Do you realize what a perk is? Do you realize that subscribing offers more perks than just the craft bags? Do you realize that many of these perks are also available for purchase in the crown store, and that the option to purchase them has not stopped them from still being subscriber perks? Why should craft bags be any different?

It is rather obvious. If the previous sub perks were bringing in tons of subs, ZOS might have sold the craft bag. It likely became clear, that if they didn't add a big incentive to sub, that the number of subs would continue to dwindle. Businesses that don't have predictable income have trouble planning for future content. If you don't know if you'll make money, it is hard to plan to spend that money.

Introducing the Crafting Bag! A huge reason to sub and likely bloated their sub numbers overnight. If people can one time purchase this, the game would go back to having very little reason to sub.

Companies don't offer perks out of the goodness of their hearts. They want you to subsribe to a payment plan so that they can show that they have a predictable and rather stable revenue stream.

This isn't about what subs should get and what is fair and good in the world. It is about how to run a business. Judging from the number of people that have said they are subbing for the bag, it sounds like a smart business move by ZOS.

Here's the problem. A number of players (I'd have to do a lot of forum digging to determine exactly which ones) who have argued that the craft bags should remain for subscribers only have used the "sunk cost fallacy" as a rationalization to attempt to convince others who have already purchased other items available as subscriber perks (DLC, etc.) that they should subscribe. Key to this argument is the idea that the DLC remains a subscriber perk, regardless of whether a player has already purchased access to such content. But you can't have it both ways, either perks are still perks, even when available for purchase, or they all cease to be perks if they have been bought. Which is it? If the former, then it should not matter to those who subscribe for this perk if it is also available for purchase. If the latter, then "sunk cost" is no longer a valid argument for subscription.

Now, you can talk about ZOS's motivations for doing it this way, and I will fully agree that ZOS chose this path because they thought it would make them more money. I think it is dishonest for them to do so, but I won't dispute you on their reasoning. However, that's not what I'm asking about, nor what I am interested in. I want to know why subscribers feel their perk would no longer be a perk, simply because someone else chose to purchase it. It doesn't take anything away from them, and if they so choose, they would have the same option available. It would work the exact same way as the DLC perks, and would be just as fair. So how does having one more perk available for purchase negate it being a perk (from the perspective of the player, not ZOS).

But of course you are right, ZOS is doing this for the money. Since ZOS has shown that they have no intention of keeping their previous promises, the only way to change their mind on this will be to show them that they are wrong. To do that, those who have chosen to purchase content rather then subscribe need to not begin subscribing for these bags. If a significant enough portion of the players take this option, ZOS will see that they were wrong, and should realize that there is more money to be made by offering these (or an alternative) for purchase. This is the path I intend to take, but knowing my fellow gamers as I do, I expect that their will is weak and many will cave. Pansies.

I don't know why subs don't want this in the crown store. I don't care. It isn't about what subs want. If you don't want to talk about ZOS's motivations, then I don't know what to talk about.

ZOS wants people subbed. Making this a one time purchase will reduce the number of people who sub for it. Sure they make some money, but those people might never purchase another thing ever. However when people are subbed they are locked in for at least a little while and you can expect to recieve money from them. This is why they give you a discount the longer your sub option is. The longer the better because then they have you locked in and can show investors and shareholders how many customers they have and what projected income they can expect.

Sure getting the bag in addition to other stuff we get for subbing is a perk, but it isn't one that is going to bring in the subs that ZOS wants.

Callous2208 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Callous2208 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

@Blackbird71 , it is because people know that the crafting bag is an extreme advantage and want to be on the winning side of the game rather than the side that deals with hours of inventory micro-management. Who wouldn't want potential opponents to be at a disadvantage?

What do I win for having a more organized inventory than someone else? What do I do with all this free time while the non-sub hoarders micro manager their inventories?

you win hours of your life - read a book.

Any suggestions? I need some good summer reading material.

The Ego and It's Own